I feel like a lone wolf regarding this film
#61
Posted 19 August 2002 - 05:31 PM
Hey, I thought you compared Connery to a little schoolboy in one of your earlier posts. Don't tell me you're changing your mind. I guess it's possible since you can only watch the 2 Dalton movies so many times before you're sick of them.
#62
Posted 19 August 2002 - 05:33 PM
I was only comparing him to a schoolboy in certain respects - such as his willingness to make a show of himself when he's supposed to be a spy
#63
Posted 19 August 2002 - 05:38 PM
#64
Posted 19 August 2002 - 05:43 PM
#65
Posted 19 August 2002 - 05:45 PM
#66
Posted 19 August 2002 - 05:48 PM
#67
Posted 19 August 2002 - 05:49 PM
#68
Posted 19 August 2002 - 05:52 PM
#69
Posted 19 August 2002 - 05:56 PM
#70
Posted 19 August 2002 - 08:54 PM
#71
Posted 20 August 2002 - 03:43 PM
Originally posted by Victor Zokas
Unbelievably, in the UK one of the main national channels has shown at least twice now the full uncut version of LTK. This went out about 7.30 pm each time.
The video version I had was the original 15 cert version. The region 1 and 2 DVD releases both went for the US version which has less cuts than in Europe. But this version on TV was the full uncut version as only released in Japan.
Compared to the UK 15 version, you get to see Lupe getting whipped. There is a godd 30 seconds more of Leiter meeting the shark. You get to see Krest's head explode rather than just the aftermath. Most gruesome is the extended version of Dario's legs going through the mincer.
All this from a TV channel that usually censors every knife out of a Bond. YOLT was much shorter with no shurikens in sight.
Are you sure the Japanese version of LTK is the full uncut version? I own a Japanese VHS copy of the film and it seems identical to the UK 15 version.
#72
Posted 20 August 2002 - 04:33 PM
When MGM's gone a bit nuts
When there's really absolutely no news about DAD around every curve...
There's always the "Licence to Kill: Potential Landfill or What?" debate to fall back on
Whatever the (de)merits of the film, it does seem to be a love/hate thing. Yet to see anyone get this worked up about (say) Octopussy or Live and Let Die.
Fascinates me.
#73
Posted 20 August 2002 - 04:40 PM
#74
Posted 20 August 2002 - 07:34 PM
#75
Posted 22 August 2002 - 03:38 PM
#76
Posted 22 August 2002 - 03:41 PM
#77
Posted 22 August 2002 - 07:28 PM
#78
Posted 22 August 2002 - 08:06 PM
#79
Posted 22 August 2002 - 08:29 PM
#80
Posted 23 August 2002 - 01:46 PM
#81
Posted 09 September 2002 - 01:09 PM
"This film is criticised because it falls under the Dalton catergory and because it was made at a time where everyone watched Willis/Ford/Stallone/Arnie in their vests and not the dinner suit."
Bingo, IGS, you hit it right on the head. LTK came out of the last year of the 80s and as a result, it had a lot to compete with. Action films had changed in that decade and the Bonds had to change with them. I like the fact that it was gritty and that Bond was closer to Fleming's concept of him than Roger Moore's (thank God). Don't get me wrong, folks. I grew up watching the Moore Bonds and I thought they were great. But then I read the books. And then I saw the Connery films and thought " this is how they should be".
Timothy Dalton did a wonderful job. He should have done 2 or 3 more of them. Hell, he was the best trained actor out of all of them! Sure, it was a mistake to turn Bond into a SNAG in TLD, but that was a reflection of the times. Dare I say that Dalton managed to put his own stamp on the role, something that Pierce Brosnan only started doing with TWINE. Man, I hope "Die Another Day" turns out to be great.
As for Willis/Ford/Stallone/Arnie,well I suppose people were getting tired of Bond not breaking a sweat while saving the world. It would be great to see 007 at the end of a film nowadays looking like Bruce Willis at the end of "Die Hard" (remember Sean in the air vent in "Dr. No" ?).The only problem with Hollywood Action films of that time is that they were pretty hit-and-miss. Luckily, Hollywood had Harrison Ford to save the day.
And luckily for us, EON Productions took a break and planned their next move...and it payed off big time.
And Dr. Tynan? Maybe you are in a minority, but stick to your guns. Bond doesn't always have to go up against a guy with some kind of deformity who's hell-bent on taking over the world. What's wrong with turning rogue and setting out on revenge, anyway? I wish I could do it, but I have a wife, two kids and a mortgage.
Remember OHMSS? 007 resigns and goes after Blofeld. There's always been talk that if Sean Connery had been in that one, it would have been regarded as one of the best Bonds ever made. But I digress.
This has gone on long enough. My post, that is.
#82
Posted 09 September 2002 - 01:56 PM
#83
Posted 09 September 2002 - 04:43 PM
"Not fond"
#84
Posted 09 September 2002 - 05:47 PM
Originally posted by killkenny kid
I belive that the only problem I have with LTK is that it try to follow the thend of the Die Hard and Lethal Weapon series. I feel that Bond sould stand alone or be the leader of this kind of movies, not a follower. Think about it they try with LALD/black movies ofthe 70's and MR/Star Wars and it didn't work.
I'd more say it was 'following' the Schwarzenegger film Raw Deal, the story of a FBI agent who was been kicked out of the agency and goes on a personal vendetta against a drug kingpin by infiltrating his orginization as hired muscle. The film also stars Robert Davi.
#85
Posted 09 September 2002 - 09:21 PM
#86
Posted 10 September 2002 - 01:22 PM
I belive that the only problem I have with LTK is that it try to follow the thend of the Die Hard and Lethal Weapon series. I feel that Bond sould stand alone or be the leader of this kind of movies, not a follower. Think about it they try with LALD/black movies ofthe 70's and MR/Star Wars and it didn't work.
I always had the impression that EON Productions felt that Bond after Moore should be more hard-edged in order to compete with the Arnie movies/Die Hards/ Lethal Weapons etc. BTW, I'm glad that Pierce Brosnan finally got to play Bond when he did. His face looked better after he turned 40.
Hey, killkenny, did you name yourself after one of Pierce Brosnan's characters from "Remington Steele" ? If I remember correctly, it was the episode where his partner, Laura Holt, finds out that Steele used to be an amateur boxer back in Ireland called "The Killkenny Kid". I recall one TV reviewer who said he couldn't believe someone with a perfect profile like Brosnan's could pass as an ex-boxer.
If you did get your name from that episode, well, excellent work, my friend.
P.S.- I read a small (thankfully) article in the paper recently where Rupert Everett stated in an interview in Germany (I think) that he would be "brilliant" as Bond. But he concedes that he'll probably never be considered for the role because he is gay.
Personally, I think he shouldn't get it because his nose is all wrong.
#87
Posted 10 September 2002 - 02:06 PM
#88
Posted 10 September 2002 - 02:55 PM
Originally posted by Dr. Tynan
I take it you don't like LTK Jim
Good guess.
...hurl it off "a" bridge; stamp upon it until it squeaks its last; grind your heel into its upturned face; remove its dignity by laughing behind its back; abuse its simple doe-eyed trust by taking a mallet to it; render it incapable of surfacing again by weighing it down with lead and bunging it off the quayside; use the DVD version as a drinks coaster, or a frisbee for your hamster; blame it for all the ills in the world and spurn it, spurn it I tells yer.
These are a few of my favourite things
#89
Posted 10 September 2002 - 04:15 PM
You have restored my faith! I might not have quite the same level of feelings for LTK as you Jim, but you certainly made me laugh!
#90
Posted 10 September 2002 - 04:17 PM